Entertainment Blogs

An online journal about visual art, the urban landscape and design. Mary Louise Schumacher, the Journal Sentinel's art and architecture critic, leads the discussion and a community of writers contribute to the dialogue.

While we strive for a lively and vigorous debate of the issues, we do not tolerate name calling, foul language or other inappropriate behavior. Please see our discussion guidelines and terms of use for more information.

While we do our best to moderate comments, we do not screen comments before they are posted. If you see a comment that violates our guidelines, please use the "Report Abuse" link to notify us of the issue.

i was not surprised at all to hear the comment, "Thanks, suckers!" from DoneBestDone. i also didn't take it seriously. obviously they were joking around. obviously they are happy to have gotten the money. and obviously they are thankful to get the attention and positive reinforcement. that's what they do is about right? having their friends and girlfriends tell them how funny and cool they are, right? it's obviously not about creating well constructed, well thought out works of contemporary art. don't thy all play in bands too. it's all about attention for them. maybe we should be upset that more than half the work in the nohl show is garbage every year, not that women aren't represented. what does this say about our community? about our art schools, programs and organizations? if what i have seen in the nohl show the last 5 years is the best milwaukee has to offer, we all need to reevaluate what we are doing here in milwaukee and why we continue to produce artwork so far below what is being shown in NY, Chicago and LA. maybe this dialogue will help. maybe not.

Ms. Schumacher, while I do appreciate your care for the Milwaukee art community and concerns about gender bias in the selection process, I am not sure your comments are well aimed unless you've been appointed guard dog against fellowship ingratitude. Your remarks were as snide as those of donebestdone's (who seem rebellious while following a consistent trend of irreverence, where yours just strike me as obnoxiously reciprocal).

That being said, I understand the gut reaction (albeit not situated in the context of their art) against ingratitude and sarcasm. I myself am a rule-follower and like to work within the system of art, academics, etc. I funnel my ambition and creativity through a hellish process of social etiquette. And I hate it. Rule-followers find it difficult to understand and respect the irreverence of rule-breakers. But people who push boundaries are just as likely, often more likely to inspire dialogue and change. More than that, it's refreshing and exciting. At the very least, there could be more mutual regard between rule-breakers and followers in the art world. Why not?

After seeing a show, the website, and the exhibit at the Inova gallery, I found donebestdone's art to be as refreshing and exciting as decadently complex and irreverently sarcastic. The intentionality of their process and artwork deserves more thoughtful interpretation than you and, um, Ralph have chosen to give. And it's funny.

Remember Andy Warhol? He painted on crappy materials at times to screw with people's ideas about art and packaging and, yes, to screw with his patrons.

... regarding gender bias, don't you think the problem is more complex than the selection process itself? To me, that conversation about gender is so much more interesting than this petty attack.

Jkotting - here's the thing. I think their art is worthless. Maybe less than worthless.

You, with your superior taste, think it's genius. Or 'decadently complex' or 'irreverently sarcastic' or whatever. You can't get enough of them. No doubt you are one of the aesthetic elite in this town, telling the rest of us uncultured mouth-breathers what is deserving of our 'thoughtful interpretation'. Maybe if the us rubes could stop milking our cows long enough to find out what's so special about, say, some mess that Jackson Pollack made, then the right sides of our brains would swell to be as big as yours.

Short of that, I guess we couldn't possibly discern when an artist is being a disrespectful jerk in an interview vs. 'just joking'.

Dear Ralph,Here I thought you were lacking in humor, and then you come out with a series of wickedly funny turns of phrases - uncultured mouth-breathers, rubes, milking cows, not to mention "Dumbbestdumb." You seem to enjoy sarcasm as much as the rest of us, so... is it really just my vocabulary that angers you so much?

I'm not from Milwaukee, but I did grow up on a cow farm where I learned to read and write. I even developed a taste for off-color humor in art, imagine that. I'm certainly not in the aesthetic elite, but I'd like to think I'm entitled to an opinion and a three-syllable word or two when I choose to state my opinion. Who's really condescending here? Who's really handing out disrespect? If you know the rules, maybe you should compile a list for artists to follow. In all sincerity, I ask you... what's your investment? What are you defending? Are you the Ralph for the job?

Jkotting - I am not angered by your vocab. On the contrary, the world needs more articulate folks who also know their way around an udder. To answer your question - I don't have an 'investment' of any sort - I am just another blog reader, ok?

It doesn't matter to me if this individual becomes the 'next big thing' or goes back to working the grill at George Webb's. If I am defending anything, it would be MLS's viewpoint in her original blog post - the one that started this discussion.

I think what offends people about Mr. Vande Slunt's remark, is that it strikes hard upon one of our sacred cows in Milwaukee, and the midwest in general, and that is that we should all be good little workers, but not to stand out too much, unless its in a way that the community sanctions. Or perhaps it stings our unquestioned assumption that poor unestablished artists should be grateful for a handout? Or perhaps, he poked too hard at our internalized authoritarian notion that when you take money for your art, you should bow your head in obedience to the giver, despite your truths as an artist?

I don't see how taking a money prize for your art is a requirement to give up ones liberty as an artist, don your beauty queens crown gracefully and smile and wave at the judges. Or maybe cry and jump up and down, while clutching your roses to your bosom?

Art in Milwaukee is something, for too many of us, what we poke a stick at. We can proudly display the Calatrava in silhouette on our official City Letterhead, but when did it become more important to us as a claim to fame, and a gold medal on our city uniform? We point to it as the Mast on our Ship of Art, and hope the corporate patrons roll in to stuff money in the all the holes in the bottom. So, we throw parties to attract attention, but most of the attention is to each other and the free wine. Same goes for the articles about local art in almost ALL of the cities periodicals. Better explain it with little plaques next to the work. People might not figure it out on their own...

God forbid somebody scratch at the veneer, and begin dialogue, especially one consistent with their art.

And before anyone flames me for defending Donebestdone as an elitist and a degenerate, I'll flame myself, and point out one elitist and degenerate, Marcel DuChamp, who took a print of the Mona Lisa, and graffitoed letters, which, when said in french, sounds like "she has a hot ass". If you see that peice, please stay behind the the velvet rope and respect the history of the dialogue of art. And don't dare touch it, its worth a lot of money.

E-mail Newsletter

Keep up with the art scene and trends in urban design with art and architecture critic Mary Louise Schumacher. Every week, you'll get the latest reviews, musings on architecture and her picks for what to do on the weekends.